Re: Solar Activity Report for 8/11/05

I think I understand what you re getting at, Jim, and we re actually talking about two different things. What I was talking about is overall solar activity

Message 1 of 16
, Aug 16, 2005

0 Attachment

I think I understand what you're getting at, Jim, and we're actually
talking about two different things. What I was talking about is
overall solar activity associated with the solar max. If I understand
you correctly, you're talking about coronal holes in particular.

However, I'm still confused. You'll have more days of high solar wind
speed with the solar max than with the bottom of the cycle.
Therefore, it would seem that the connection between higher solar
activity and higher terrestrial temps would still work. As far as the
Earth is concerned, a high solar wind speed is a high solar wind
speed, no matter if the speedy wind is coming from a coronal hole or
the most recent really impressive X-class flare. That being the case,
I don't see how a high speed solar wind from a coronal hole can cause
cooling, while an active sun causes warming.

Unless you're saying that the overall increase in solar energy output
of an active sun is enough to offset the effect of the high-speed wind??

space1weather

In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather variables when certain

Message 2 of 16
, Aug 17, 2005

0 Attachment

In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that
seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather
variables when certain atmopsheric oceanic teleconnections are in
place.

Steering currents...trough ..ridge etc...Where will the Bermuda high
be?

The Baranyi paper talks about the importance of different magnetic
field vectors etc...and it's relationship with corpuscular radiaton.
Everywhere is not effected the same. This has always been my thought
also.

As far as C-holes and CME's. These are two different ball games
unless the CME is a tranisient. The Earths environment reacts
totally different and it should. The wave action within a CME is
completely different than a C-hole.

Look at the neutron monitors yesterday. GCR level hardly changed
even though solar wind speed was near 700 km/sec. This is not going
to occur with a CME. The > 2 Mev Electron fluence levels stayed
above 0.0e+07. This also is not usually going to occur.

These fake skeptics continue to ignore what ELECTRICAL and BIOLOGICAL
orders are brought to the climate system. Note that in this
discussion there is not ONE WORD about electrical or biological order
to the climate system. NOTHING.

Anyway, to this idea of an event horizon. Obviously, when a study
shows that tropical storm intensity and frequency has increased, that
is a sign of low entropy. Really low entropy. Or put another way a
lot of order. That order tends to go to disorder. Warm goes to
cold. Clouds in a circle or line fuzz out to no pressure differences
in no patterns. That is the way of the closed system, which, of
course, is not closed. The problem is that the orders imposed on
cloud microphysics differ from that brught about by heat and
pressures alone. And those orders, as you point out, are complex
from the input end. I am here to say they are also complex from the
dampening side as well--what the biosphere as a whole does with what
comes in.

The confusions are there across all the horizons.

So there are event horizons like the sun coming up from night to day--
but then there is the electrical part---how the sun can heat and
cause thunderstorms on one side of the earth in the afternoon and
those thunderstorms can connect electrical conditions to the dark
side of the earth.

There is the sun going through the solar cycle, and what changes in
lumenosity may have different electrical conditions that cause the
way fronts and air currents move, just as you suggest, in different
manners. That is because the microphysics changes mean different
viscosity values, different ways that order moves toward disorder.

When I have looked at my long range hurricane forecast, I have been
looking for the solar cycle and hurricane history for climatology to
see if I can spot what occurs globally with different solar inputs.

When I look at what you and David are doing, I have a more complex
set of ideas. There isn't much time for modulation to occur, either,
other than the basic stuff, like where are the hydrate fields and
microbial blooms and so forth. Plus the barotropic trends, where the
SOI, NAO, PDO, ENSO is, and so forth. Then I have been looking at
strikes, of course.

> In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that
> seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather
> variables when certain atmopsheric oceanic teleconnections are in
> place.
>
> Steering currents...trough ..ridge etc...Where will the Bermuda

high

> be?
>
> The Baranyi paper talks about the importance of different magnetic
> field vectors etc...and it's relationship with corpuscular

radiaton.

> Everywhere is not effected the same. This has always been my

thought

> also.
>
> As far as C-holes and CME's. These are two different ball games
> unless the CME is a tranisient. The Earths environment reacts
> totally different and it should. The wave action within a CME is
> completely different than a C-hole.
>
> Look at the neutron monitors yesterday. GCR level hardly changed
> even though solar wind speed was near 700 km/sec. This is not going
> to occur with a CME. The > 2 Mev Electron fluence levels stayed
> above 0.0e+07. This also is not usually going to occur.
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
> --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David"

<b1blancer1@e...>

> wrote:
> > I think I understand what you're getting at, Jim, and we're
> actually
> > talking about two different things. What I was talking about is
> > overall solar activity associated with the solar max. If I
> understand
> > you correctly, you're talking about coronal holes in particular.
> >
> > However, I'm still confused. You'll have more days of high solar
> wind
> > speed with the solar max than with the bottom of the cycle.
> > Therefore, it would seem that the connection between higher solar
> > activity and higher terrestrial temps would still work. As far

as

> the
> > Earth is concerned, a high solar wind speed is a high solar wind
> > speed, no matter if the speedy wind is coming from a coronal hole
> or
> > the most recent really impressive X-class flare. That being the
> case,
> > I don't see how a high speed solar wind from a coronal hole can
> cause
> > cooling, while an active sun causes warming.
> >
> > Unless you're saying that the overall increase in solar energy
> output
> > of an active sun is enough to offset the effect of the high-speed
> wind??

David

... If this is true, it just made things a whole lot more complicated. On a global scale, we know that an absence of sunspots, even for a relatively short

> In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that
> seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather
> variables when certain atmopsheric oceanic teleconnections are in
> place.
>
> Steering currents...trough ..ridge etc...Where will the Bermuda high
> be?

If this is true, it just made things a whole lot more complicated. On
a global scale, we know that an absence of sunspots, even for a
relatively short time, can cause a striking effect. From what I've
seen, though, I don't believe coronal hole frequency changes with the
sunspot cycles.

>
> The Baranyi paper talks about the importance of different magnetic
> field vectors etc...and it's relationship with corpuscular radiaton.
> Everywhere is not effected the same. This has always been my thought
> also.
>

I hadn't really thought about it in that way before, but I could see
the possibility.

Okay, so if we have a case of different parts of the world being
affected in different ways by a high-speed solar wind, would the same
hold true for CME impacts and solar radiation storms?

space1weather

... complicated. On ... the ... I asked that coronal hole question to a well regarded SEC solar expert years ago. She said she did not have the answer. Well

> a global scale, we know that an absence of sunspots, even for a
> relatively short time, can cause a striking effect. From what I've
> seen, though, I don't believe coronal hole frequency changes with

the

> sunspot cycles.

I asked that coronal hole question to a well regarded SEC solar
expert years ago. She said she did not have the answer. Well if the
aurora was not seen for decades in the northern latitudes during the
Maunder minimum then the coronal holes had to have been absent
during the lulls.

Now I know you can have very low geomagnetic activity...like the
latest ...with some fairly strong 700 km/sec winds but something odd
would have to happen with the IMF-earth's magnetic field for us to
have no high latitude storming everyone once in a while.

People may not have known what the northern lights actually wereback
then but they were written about all the time. I have a book with
historical sightings that goes back several centuries...with
specific dates.. for the big ones

Now if you believe like I have for quite some time and some recent
papers are saying that the changes in the pole's polarities are
related to the cyclical nature of their presence...espeically
around maximum..when the poles reverse polarities (10/99-5/2000 C-
hole one example) than this would make sense.

I would imagine that the poles must get extremely weak...magnetic
wise... or one pole completely dominates over the other and you
almost just have one polarity.

> I hadn't really thought about it in that way before, but I could

see

> the possibility.
>
> Okay, so if we have a case of different parts of the world being
> affected in different ways by a high-speed solar wind, would the

same

> hold true for CME impacts and solar radiation storms?

Absolutely and I have seen relationships with them. I believe the
truth about these relationships have alluded us for so long because
what seemed like an obvious relationship...ones investigated...
didn't hold much water ... and what most likely is a relationship...
never entered most peoples mind.

The meteorological and climatological community have been in charge
of most of this research...somewhat...and they just could not
comprehend or admit as to how some areas could be effected and not
others. I have had this exact discussions with many individuals
within the field over the years.

That was their biggest obstacle with them believing in my forecasts.
Even after they occurred. They said that it could not effect us and
not....maybe Colorado etc...

Jim

David

... Even a blank sun can have a coronal hole make an appearance, as we ve seen, so I ll assume they were around during the Maunder Minimum. Then again, there

Message 6 of 16
, Aug 21, 2005

0 Attachment

> I asked that coronal hole question to a well regarded SEC solar
> expert years ago. She said she did not have the answer. Well if the
> aurora was not seen for decades in the northern latitudes during the
> Maunder minimum then the coronal holes had to have been absent
> during the lulls.

Even a blank sun can have a coronal hole make an appearance, as we've
seen, so I'll assume they were around during the Maunder Minimum.
Then again, there was obviously something odd happening to suppress
the sunspots to such a degree for a long (from our perspective) period
of time, so who knows?

>
> Now I know you can have very low geomagnetic activity...like the
> latest ...with some fairly strong 700 km/sec winds but something odd
> would have to happen with the IMF-earth's magnetic field for us to
> have no high latitude storming everyone once in a while.

Agreed.

>
> People may not have known what the northern lights actually wereback
> then but they were written about all the time. I have a book with
> historical sightings that goes back several centuries...with
> specific dates.. for the big ones
>
> Now if you believe like I have for quite some time and some recent
> papers are saying that the changes in the pole's polarities are
> related to the cyclical nature of their presence...espeically
> around maximum..when the poles reverse polarities (10/99-5/2000 C-
> hole one example) than this would make sense.
>
> I would imagine that the poles must get extremely weak...magnetic
> wise... or one pole completely dominates over the other and you
> almost just have one polarity.
>

I dunno, maybe. Or, the solar magnetic field could become really
convoluted with north and south poles popping up in all sorts of odd
places until it settles down into the new polarity.

space1weather

... we ve ... period ... Well I would tend to think you are right at first but if you think about it for a second we are only going by what has occured the

> seen, so I'll assume they were around during the Maunder Minimum.
> Then again, there was obviously something odd happening to suppress
> the sunspots to such a degree for a long (from our perspective)

period

> of time, so who knows?

Well I would tend to think you are right at first but if you think
about it for a second we are only going by what has occured the past
few decades.

The poles are strongest towards minimum and they can wax and wane
almost throughout the whole cycle except for the short stint right
after solar minimum and during the rise towards maximum.

If the sun is extremely quiet than the poles have to be also....or
at least out of character from what they have been behaving like for
the past few decades.

Could they pop up everywhere like you mentioned? I don't know...
maybe....but in a way they do already...with sunspot regions and
coronal holes. I could not disregard any theory with what little we
know about it. I seem to recall a similar theory regarding the
earth's magnetic flip..although different.

Jim

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.